• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Smoking in Cars

What do you think about smoking in cars?

  • Total voters
    41
My car? My Rights! If I own something? I should be able to smoke cigs (which is LEGAL!) anytime I want without having to do to anything. The Car is MINE.

Having said that? Of course I am gonna at least crack a window in the Winter if some little brat is in my car:)
 
I'm torn on this. If a person is pro-life (which means you want to protect the life of someone who can't defend themself) wouldn't you want this ban? What choice does the kid have other than to be subjected to the smoke of his/her irresponsible parent(s)? It's not like the kid can just get out of the car and walk or something. Whose liberty is more important? The older citizen who has the right to kill themself slowly or the young citizen who has no choice but to be subjected to the older citizens irresponsibility? I think liberty has its limits. When liberty becomes harmful to a person who has no other choice but to be subjected to said name "liberty", it ceases to be liberty and turns into oppression and tyranny.
 
Btw, is Arkansas wants to establish this, they have every right to do it. It's their state.
 
MarineTpartier said:
Btw, is Arkansas wants to establish this, they have every right to do it. It's their state.
Click to expand...
like slavery, which some states authorized while others did not. got it
and i bet you hold yourself out as someone who advocates for smaller government, too
 
Tucker Case said:
Being in the car at all is more dangerous than second hand smoke. By a country mile.
Click to expand...

So therefore its okay to just add to the possibility of injuring your kids by forcing them to be a closed in environment where they have to breath secondhand smoke...right?

Kids have no choice to be in a car or being in a car with a smoker who don't have any regard for their kids health...despite known there is all the evidence in the world that says they put their kids at risk of short and long-term health problems.
 
Tucker Case said:
Being in the car at all is more dangerous than second hand smoke. By a country mile.
Click to expand...

Being out of bed each day is more dangerous than being in a car. By a galactic parsec...
 
Removable Mind said:
So therefore its okay to just add to the possibility of injuring your kids by forcing them to be a closed in environment where they have to breath secondhand smoke...right?
Click to expand...

......Yes?
 
I wonder which makes more deadly fumes the car or the smoker? Seems like they're banning the wrong thing. :roll:
 
Removable Mind said:
So therefore its okay to just add to the possibility of injuring your kids by forcing them to be a closed in environment where they have to breath secondhand smoke...right?
Click to expand...

No. I'm saying that we should focus on real dangers instead of imaginary ones. Car accidents are the number one killer of children under 18. Second-hand smoke ain't even on the radar.

If we want to ban something in order to protect children, we should ban something that will actually do something useful. The bonus is that banning people from driving their children around will also prevent any of them from being exposed to second hand smoke in the car.

Kids have no choice to be in a car or being in a car with a smoker who don't have any regard for their kids health...despite known there is all the evidence in the world that says they put their kids at risk of short and long-term health problems.
Click to expand...

By putting their kids in the car, they place that child at far more risk for death and long term injury than second-hand smoke does. The child often doesn't have a choice to be in a car. If it's all about the children, we should simply ban driving with children in the car altogether. Problem solved and now we can actually protect children in the process.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Being out of bed each day is more dangerous than being in a car. By a galactic parsec...
Click to expand...

Actually, cars are a major reason why being out of bed is dangerous. Remove them from the picture, being out of bed would probably only be slightly more dangerous than being in bed.
 
To combat children being subjugated to second hand smoke in cars, I propose the parents roll all the windows down fully regardless of weather or temperature. This solves the second hand smoke delima. ;)
 
justabubba said:
like slavery, which some states authorized while others did not. got it
and i bet you hold yourself out as someone who advocates for smaller government, too
Click to expand...
You know something, I haven't been on this website for very long but I have yet to see a post you submit be of any worth or intelligence. Your existence on this website is only to instigate and harass people that are actually looking for level, civil debate. I think you need a serious dose of self-confidence and self-worth because if all you have in your life to make you feel better is to come on this website and try to disavow other's opinions, you're in a bad way. Go to church, a counselor, or some __________ anonymous meeting man. Life isn't that bad.
 
Tucker Case said:
Actually, cars are a major reason why being out of bed is dangerous. Remove them from the picture, being out of bed would probably only be slightly more dangerous than being in bed.
Click to expand...
Are you being serious or just trying to prove a point? I can't figure it out.
 
MarineTpartier said:
You know something, I haven't been on this website for very long but I have yet to see a post you submit be of any worth or intelligence. Your existence on this website is only to instigate and harass people that are actually looking for level, civil debate. I think you need a serious dose of self-confidence and self-worth because if all you have in your life to make you feel better is to come on this website and try to disavow other's opinions, you're in a bad way. Go to church, a counselor, or some __________ anonymous meeting man. Life isn't that bad.
Click to expand...
being without a rejoinder, all that is left for you is to attack the member whose posts you cannot defeat in debate
pity
 
justabubba said:
like slavery, which some states authorized while others did not. got it
and i bet you hold yourself out as someone who advocates for smaller government, too
Click to expand...

So, why are you comparing a simple smoking law to slavery?
 
Wake said:
So, why are you comparing a simple smoking law to slavery?
Click to expand...
its his states rights argument i am making the comparison toward
 
justabubba said:
its his states rights argument i am making the comparison toward
Click to expand...

Yet what's wrong with that argument? If Arkansas wants to put up that smoking law, then it's no big deal. To try and bring slavery into the mix is similar to Godwinning a debate.
 
Last edited:
justabubba said:
its his states rights argument i am making the comparison toward
Click to expand...

State's rights were co-opted by the pro-slavery movement, but that doesn't mean that the issue of State's rights is bad. Just like if I were use a wrench to kill someone, it doesn't mean that wrenches are murder weapons.
 
:violin:
justabubba said:
being without a rejoinder, all that is left for you is to attack the member whose posts you cannot defeat in debate
pity
Click to expand...
I know, I received a warning for it. Sorry to insult you justabubba. I will never call you out on your actions again.:violin:
 
Wake said:
Yet what's wrong with that argument? If Arkansas wants to put up that smoking law, then it's no big deal. To try and bring slavery into the mix is similar to Godwinning a debate.
Click to expand...

the states' rights point was made to respond to the assertion that under the guise of state's rights we should accept bad laws
hopefully, we all acknowledge the legalization of slavery was wrong
similarly, i was (weakly, it seems) presenting that a states' right argument in this instance does not similarly make a bad law an acceptable one
the legalized slavery reference was used to make a very obvious point that sometimes states get it very, very wrong ... as did arkansas in this instance (about something much less significant than slavery)
 
justabubba said:
the states' rights point was made to respond to the assertion that under the guise of state's rights we should accept bad laws
hopefully, we all acknowledge the legalization of slavery was wrong
similarly, i was (weakly, it seems) presenting that a states' right argument in this instance does not similarly make a bad law an acceptable one
the legalized slavery reference was used to make a very obvious point that sometimes states get it very, very wrong ... as did arkansas in this instance (about something much less significant than slavery)
Click to expand...

Well, then why bring slavery up? There's nothing inherently wrong with Arkansas bringing up a smoking law [in cars], that protect children. I don't think Arkansas is getting this one wrong.
 
Wake said:
Well, then why bring slavery up? There's nothing inherently wrong with Arkansas bringing up a smoking law [in cars], that protect children. I don't think Arkansas is getting this one wrong.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think Arkansas is making a good decision on this one. Nothing is more disgusting than seeing the helpless be subjected to the practices of the stupid. I think its stupid to smoke and children are helpless to avoid it if their parents do it. Good on ya Arkansas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom